alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 232 (Tuesday, December 5, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 84328]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26688]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as 
other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for 
immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and 
at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be 
obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the 
appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of 
Information Office at https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/request.htm. 
Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards 
enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).
    Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at 
the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, 
Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington DC 20551-0001, not later than January 4, 2024.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Jeffrey Imgarten, Assistant 
Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001. 
Comments can also be sent electronically to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#307b737140405c59535144595f5e735f5d5d555e4443705b531e5642521e5f4257"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ffb4bcbe8f8f93969c9e8b969091bc9092929a918b8cbf949cd1998d9dd1908d98">[email protected]</span></a>:
    1. Firstar Financial Corp., Muskogee, Oklahoma; to merge with 
Stigler Bancorporation, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire The First 
National Bank of Stigler, both of Stigler, Oklahoma.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Michele Taylor Fennell,
Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2023-26688 Filed 12-4-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 45 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 45

  Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to require each 
 report of a committee on a public bill or public joint resolution to 
 include an analysis of whether the bill or joint resolution creates a 
program, office, or initiative that would duplicate or overlap with an 
    existing program, office, or initiative, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 22, 2015

    Mr. Guinta (for himself, Ms. Graham, Mr. Cook, Mr. Costello of 
    Pennsylvania, Mr. Barr, Mr. Pearce, Mr. Zinke, Mr. Cooper, Mr. 
   Peterson, Mr. Murphy of Florida, Mr. Schrader, Mr. Jolly, and Ms. 
 Sinema) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                           Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to require each 
 report of a committee on a public bill or public joint resolution to 
 include an analysis of whether the bill or joint resolution creates a 
program, office, or initiative that would duplicate or overlap with an 
    existing program, office, or initiative, and for other purposes.

    Resolved, That clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is amended by adding at the end the following new 
paragraph:
    ``(i)(1) Each report of a committee on a public bill or public 
joint resolution shall contain the following:
            ``(A) An analysis by the Congressional Research Service 
        (CRS) to determine if the bill or joint resolution creates any 
        new Federal program, office, or initiative that would duplicate 
        or overlap with any existing Federal entity with similar 
        mission, purpose, goals, or activities, along with a listing of 
        all such instances of duplication or overlapping created by the 
        bill or joint resolution.
            ``(B) If the analysis provided under subdivision (A) 
        indicates that the new program, office, or initiative would 
        create duplication or overlapping, an explanation provided by 
        the committee as to why the creation of the new program, 
        office, or initiative is necessary.
    ``(2) It shall not be in order to consider a public bill or public 
joint resolution reported by a committee unless the committee has 
posted on its public website the analysis provided under subparagraph 
(1)(A) and (if necessary) the explanation provided under subparagraph 
(1)(B).''.
                                 <all>
```
April 27, 2000

22405

#### Mauna Kea Agribusiness Co. Inc. v. Heirs or assigns of Keepalawa

Affirmed
26107

#### State v. Narmore

Affirmed
28168, 28169

#### State v. Taylor

Vacated and Affirmed
16539

#### State v. Connevey

December 9, 1996

Order No. 96-37

Affirmed
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________

No. 98-40542

Summary Calendar

_______________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

MATHY WADE ROBERTS,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

(1:97-CR-82-1)

_________________________

January 7, 1999

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mathy Roberts was convicted of possession of a firearm by a

felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). On appeal, he challenges

only the sufficiency of the evidence.

The standard of review is whether any rational trier of fact

could have found that the evidence established guilt beyond a

reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318 (1979).
2

The evidence here plainly meets that standard. 

Roberts was driving a car that was being pursued by police.

A citizen saw a silver reflective object fly out of the driver's

side window. The witness called police and told them where the

object had landed. There they found a large stainless-steel

firearm. There were no other objects in the area.

The jury easily could have found that the gun that was found

was thrown by Roberts. It takes little imagination, therefore, to

conclude that he had “possessed” it in the vehicle.

AFFIRMED.
April 26, 2000

22234

#### State v. Bee

Affirmed
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                           0000854219
<NAME>                          Enex 88-89 Income & Retirement Fund - Sr 4, L.P.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 jan-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   dec-31-1996
<CASH>                                         6877
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  17223
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               24100
<PP&E>                                         1614435
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1547907
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 66528
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          90628
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     6838
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   90628
<SALES>                                        51886
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               51886
<CGS>                                          256429
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  256429
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               13790
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (218333)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed January 16, 2019.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D18- 146

Lower Tribunal No. 98-34894A

________________



### David S. Walter,

Appellant,

vs.



### The State of Florida

, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the

Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Diane V. Ward, Judge.

David S. Walter, in proper person.

Ashley Brooke Moody

, Attorney General, and Natalia Costea, Assistant

Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SCALES and LINDSEY, JJ., and LUCK, Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant David S. Walter appeals a December 8, 2017 trial court order

summarily denying, as successive, Walter’s November 20, 2017 post-convictionmotion brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Walter’s

motion alleged he was entitled to a new trial based on newly discovered evidence,

to wit, an affidavit of an alleged witness to the crime.

In February of 2017, however, Walter filed a virtually identical motion,

along with the same affidavit that accompanied Walter’s November 2017 motion.

On June 28, 2017, the trial court denied Walter’s February 2017 motion. In its

order, the trial court expressed that it was unnecessary to address the merits of the

claim because the affidavit was legally insufficient in that it lacked a jurat. Toward

the end of this order, though, the trial court elaborated by further finding the

affidavit lacked credibility and appeared to be an attempt to perpetrate a fraud on

the court. Walter did not appeal this June 28, 2017 order.

In this appeal, Walter contends that the trial court erred in finding his

November 2017 motion successive on the ground that the trial court did not reach

the merits of his February 2017 motion. We disagree. While the trial court’s June

28, 2017 order initially indicated that it was unnecessary to address the merits, the

order plainly and unequivocally determined that the affidavit upon which Walter’s

February 2017 motion was based lacked credibility. This constituted a reaching of

the merits; and thus, the trial court correctly characterized Walter’s November

2017 motion as successive. McKenley v. State

, 937 So. 2d 223, 225 (Fla. 3d DCA

22006) (“A trial court may dismiss a successive motion for post-conviction relief

that had been previously adjudicated on the merits.”).

Affirmed.

3
#### Reese v. Aloha Unlimited Travel, Inc.

26052

09/15/2006

Vacated & remanded
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14** 
**- 2367** 

OBED RAMOS HERNANDEZ ,
Petitioner ,

v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH , Attorney General , Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigr ation Appeals.

Submitted : July 6, 2015 Decided: July 24, 2015

Before WYNN and HARRIS , Circuit Judges , and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.

Dean E. Wanderer, DEAN E. WANDERER & ASSOCIATES, Fairfax, Virginia, for Petitioner. Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Cindy S. Ferrier, Assistant Director, Brendan P. Hogan, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respond ent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Obed Ramos Hernandez, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”), dismissing his appeal from the i mmigration
judge’s order finding him removable and denying his applications
for asylum, withholding of removal, and withholding under the
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We deny the petition for

review. *
Hernandez first challenges his removability as a n alien
convicted of an act involving moral turpitude, arguing that his
forgery conviction was not a crime involving moral turpitude. It
is uncontested, however, that Hernandez is removable for having
entered this country without being admitted or paroled

. See 8
U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i) (2012). Accordingly, we need not
consider whether he is also removable on other grounds.
Hernandez also challenges the denial of his request for
withholding of removal. “[A]dministrative findings of fact are

conclusive unl ess any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to
conclude to the contrary.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012). A
determination regarding eligibility for withholding of removal is
affirmed if supported by substantial evidence in the record

* Hernandez does not challenge the denial of asylum or protection under the CAT. Thus, review of those decisions is waived. Karimi v. Holder , 715 F.3d 561, 565 n.2 (4th Cir. 2013).3 considered as a whole. INS v. Elias Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 481
(1992). We conclude that substantial evidence supports the finding
that Hernandez did not meet his burden of proof for withholding of

removal.
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

NVAP Reference Guide: Emergency

Response Structure

Last Modified: 

Print

NVAP Reference Guide: Table of Contents

Questions, Comments, or Technical Issues?

NVAP Error Report Form

Preface

Introduction

Control and Eradication

Brucellosis

Johne’s Disease

Pseudorabies (PRV)

Tuberculosis

Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies

Scrapie

Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)

Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD)

Poultry
National Poultry Improvement Plan (NPIP)

Avian Influenza (AI)

Exotic Newcastle disease (END)

Equine Disease

Aquatic Animal

Aquatic Animal National Health Plan

Aquatic Animal Health Activities

Animal Health Emergency Management

Animal Health Emergency Management

Emergency Response Structure

National Response Framework (NRF)

National Incident Management System (NIMS)

National Animal Health Emergency Management System (NAHEMS)

Foreign Animal Disease Preparedness and Response Plan (FAD PReP)

FAD Recognition and Initial Response

National Animal Health Emergency Response Corps (NAHERC)

Notifiable Diseases and Conditions

WOAH and International Standards

Cleaning and Disinfection

Importance of Cleaning & Disinfection

Cleaning

Disinfection

Regulation of Disinfectants

Safety

Disease Surveillance

Laboratory Submissions

Animal Movement

Interstate Regulations

Interstate Movement of Cattle, Horses, Swine, Sheep and Goats

Issuing Interstate Animal Movement Documents

International Animal Movement

Issuing International Health Certificates (IHCs) for Live Animal Movement

Common Problems Observed on Certificates for Live Animal Movement
Animal Identification 

Animal Identification

Cattle Identification

Swine Identification

Equine Identification

Sheep and Goat Identification

Fowl Identification

Compliance and Regulations

Appendix

A: 9 CFR PARTS 160, 161, and 162

B: APHIS VS District Offices

C: State Animal Health Officials

D: Forms

E: Other Organizational Information with Contact Points

F: Web Sites

G: Equine Teeth and Aging

In the event of a major animal health emergency in the United States, the

appropriate local, State, Tribal, and Federal governments, and their partners (such

as industry) in the private sector, must respond in a coordinated, mutually

supportive manner to (1) determine the nature of the disease outbreak or other

emergency, (2) initiate an appropriate response (e.g., eliminate or control disease),

and (3) help facilitate recovery (e.g., the resumption of business and trade). 

Successful animal health emergency preparedness and response requires

integration between the National Response Framework (NRF), the National Incident

Management System (NIMS), and the National Animal Health Emergency

Management System (NAHEMS). Each of these systems has a specific function in a

hierarchical pattern from general to more specific.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 226 (Monday, November 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 82892]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26220]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 
    Tuesday, December 12, 2023 at 10:30 a.m. and its continuation at 
the conclusion of the open meeting on December 14, 2023

PLACE:  1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC and virtual (this meeting 
will be a hybrid meeting).

STATUS:  This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:  Compliance matters pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 
30109.
    Information the premature disclosure of which would be likely to 
have a considerable adverse effect on the implementation of a proposed 
Commission action.
    Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or 
arbitration.
* * * * *

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Judith Ingram, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

(Authority: Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b)

Vicktoria J. Allen,
Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2023-26220 Filed 11-22-23; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 7, 2023.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 22, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 114 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2024-71, CP2024-73.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2023-26812 Filed 12-6-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          82,520
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,696,399
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  4,266,241
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,316,682
<PP&E>                                      11,343,173
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              32,140,457
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       19,714,303
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       116,887
<OTHER-SE>                                  32,140,457
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                     35,188,880
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            35,188,880
<CGS>                                       24,947,424
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               19,543,003
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                28,840
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,127,852
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (12,458,239)
<DISCONTINUED>                              (1,727,564)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (14,185,803)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (1.75)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.75)
        

</TABLE>